Can anyone talk to me about Core Science GCSE as opposed to Triple Science please ?

[AnyFucker]

My DC just got refused Triple Science at yr 9 options and told that Core Science is adequate

I am not convinced this is a good thing. DC is quite "sciency" and likes medical type stuff although not chosen exactly what career yet. School attendance is excellent and grades are good so far.

I am not happy about this. Can anyone help me form an appeal ? All I seem to be aware of is that anything vaguely science or medical based in Higher Education would require something better than a combined science GCSE.

If there is a possibility of wanting to study science at A level then triple science is much better prep, some 6th forms insist on it

If you don't mind sharing, what sort of level is she in science and maths at the moment?

Hi AF
Ex Head of Science here.
Technically, the school are right that Core and Additional Science shouldn't close doors to a science based career, but specialist and very competitive courses like Veterinary Science and Medicine would generally be looking for Triple Science GCSE.

If your DC wants to go on to science A-Levels, Triple Sciences are a better way in (though again, it is possible to do them from Core and Additional Science, it is a bigger jump).

Many schools ask that the student is a secure Level 6 in Science in Year 9 to consider Triple Sciences. It may be that your DC's school has only one set doing Triple Science so they are being more picky.

If your DC is really keen and at least a Level 6, I would push to see whoever is in charge of Options and push the case. Best of luck.

Many schools only offer core and additional science and are able to go onto do science A levels.

Core involves Bio 1, Phys 1 and Chem 1
Additonal science involves Bio 2, Phys 2 and Chem 2
Triple Science involves all the above plus Bio 3, Phys 3 and Chem 3. It includes additonal topics rather than additional depth.

Don't assume that only the less academic pupils do core and additional as many take this route if they want to take an additional language. < not that you said that!

What reason did your school give for your DC not being allowed to take triple science?

Currently at level 6B.

I haven't spoken to school yet about this. Will telephone tomorrow if someone is about during half term. We are not a family of "disatisfieds". This will be the first time I have ever questioned anything (and this is my 2nd child to go through secondary ed)

DD1 got lumbered with core and additional. Long story, she's dyslexic and the head of science is an idiot, who thinks he knows her and hasn't a clue. He had to cover his arse for putting her in set 3 in Y7. Based souly on a numeracy CAT when she was bursting for the loo.

It almost certainly won't bother her as she got an A for core and (the highest mark, she only missed her A on a bad CA) will get A/A for additional (and almost certainly A for maths).

Both DH and me are scientists, DD1 already knows plenty of A level and degree level science.

She's staying on at the same school and gets in great with the rest of the science dept. who know she acts as TA 1/2 the time.

Fortunately, she wants to do a particular branch of science that doesn't need a RG university.

My DS is Level 7 and has chosen not to do Triple. The science teacher told him that his son had done double and then gone on to do science A Levels and that choosing Triple should not mean closing any other doors. I think DS now has a better chance of higher grades with the double. A friend's son got three Cs with the Triple and I think that two B's might have looked better. DS is happy with his other GCSE options so no closed doors to other subjects.

My only concern is that with the brighter students creamed off to do Triple, the Double classes will be more mixed ability and therefore have behaviour issues.

Ds1 has been given dual award science too and I'm annoyed. Almost no one has been 'allowed' triple science. As far as I can tell this is to give him more time trying to get a c in French so he can fulfil the school's ebacc targets rather than anything to do with his science ability or what he wants in life. In fact, no one at school has so much as asked DS what he wants to do. The computer issued an offer and that's all the discussion there was.

Actually, in my school he would have probably be turned down as well . Our triple science group are normally only level 7 pupils. But we complete triple sci in the same amount of lessons as core and additional (so don't use an option choice).
I only know of one 6th form near here (major city) that insists on triple to do Alevel science, and it is a grammar school. The pupils that have really wanted a place have taken Further Additional (basically the missing modules from triple) to get in.

It's difficult. Your ds may really really wwantthis, but I think the school have made the right choice. I don't think my school is particularly academic, but a L6b would equate to being in about set 3-4 which is normally pupils that achieve Bs. This is for 2 GCSEs. For triple, like the pp has said, you run the risk of that dropping to Cs. Then you won't get onto an A level course at all!

I had one student who studied the extra modules in their own time and sat them as a private candidate. You could do this-she wouldn't be able to sit year 10rxams with other double students, but would need to sit them all at end of year 11. Our student was allowed to complete the USA with other triple students.

I did dual science at school despite getting the highest mark possible in y9 science sats. The classes were streamed and there weren't behaviour issues. I didn't go on to do science based subjects, though.

What I don't understand is the only doing it in the two slots allocated to double science and not using another choice thing (which they do at ds1's school too). It makes no sense, especially when it means that students have to pick something else they're not all that interested in. Picking options for ds1 was a case of 'which of the subjects in this column are least awful' rather than anything else.

Calamitously-that may be the case for your son. But for most it would mean having yo choose between Science and an equally important option choice. You'd be shutting too many doors on subjects imo.

The thing is, there are lots of parents that feel their child should do triple. We have some very heated conversations every year.
When I put pupils into groups and therefore decide who is doing triple and core/additional it is based on lots of data and conversations with staff. I am not doing it to slight anyone. I am trying to make a decision that will mean the best possible outcome for your dc.

Please dont think the school benefits from doing triple science in any way. We don't get 'judged' on the extra gcse. Our 'league' tables are based only on 2 gcses. So if the class all get 3As, it is only counted that they got 2As. We do it to benefit the kids we think can achieve the highest grades.
However, if it was HOD I would also do analysis on what Alevels the pupils wanted to do. Every year we get a few who have no interest in following Sci Alevels doing triple gcse. I agree this is a waste of a space on the group.

Whilst I see the logic behind the post about Level 6b equating to a B grade GCSE and about taking future plans into account in relation to A'Levels I'd like to raise two points.

In relation to the low(er) grade(s) I don't really understand why education should be limited in relation to C+ pupils. Education is surely more important than qualifications and should be broad and thorough especially as many many people build on it throughout their lives.

In relation to what pupils want to do at A'Level, at 14 when they chose their GCSE courses they are very young and shouldn't have options turned off unless absolutely necessary at this stage in my opinion. I think that's a very sad approach. Did you know what you wanted to do at 14? My dd was contemplating medicine or a liberal arts based degree at that stage and I think it would have been a great shame to have closed down options.

As I say Education -v- qualifications although I do accept that 35-40 years ago if a child ended up in a secondary modern they got neither but the risk today is that it is happening in other schools too and even the most well qualified are coming out of the sausage machine not terribly well educated.

But I think we are agreeing windmill. My job is to get the highest grades out of my pupils. Pupils that are 'likely' to be grade c/b will 'more likely' get the higher grade sitting core/additional Science than if doing triple. No doors are being closed. They can still do Alevel Science with these qualifications. Like I said, it is only 1 6th form (a grammar) that has recently insisted on triple. Tbf, we have then allowed pupils to sit the extra modules to then be able to apply at this 6th form. Remember, a grammar would be very selective (well this one is).
In the case of the hypothetical child above, getting a C in triple science would mean they are very unlikely to be let on an Alevel course. Getting Bs in double would allow them on.

I'm not sure that they'll be missing out on anything 'incredibly important' when they're all doing 10-12 gcses though. Clearly other schools do let you use an option for it.

Ds1's school don't want the kids to do triple science because they are all about the league tables. Only double science counts so that's all they want them to do. The ebacc is measured so they insist that the kids do that (whether they want to of not). DS would gladly drop French and use a slot for extra science. He had to take history and geography because the alternatives in one of the columns were all textiles/drama/business studies. He even put re down as a second choice because there was nothing else that wasn't arty in the column.

We're investigating changing schools to find one that gives as shit about what DS wants and not just what he can do for their league table position.

I think you missed my point Peppa. It was about education -v- qualifications. The C+ child might not pass, might not even do A'Levels but that doesn't mean they shouldn't have a broad education.

When I was a lass lots and lots of people only got 2/3 O'Levels, many from top schools such as Harrow and Ampleforth. Those people left the system extremely well educated albeit not terribly well qualified or academic. Many went into the City or the Army or into other good jobs at a time when a degree wasn't the be all and the end all.

And your job shouldn't be to get the highest grades out of your pupils alone, it should also be about providing them with a good all round education and providing them with a love of learning.

Unfortunately, the world isn't like that anymore. And yes, my job IS to get the best possible grades out of my pupils. Many parents on here I'm sure would agree. Without those grades, doors are closed. In effect, the opposite of providing a broad eduction.
I do agree with your point, Windmill. Education should be about a variety. At GCSE, I think that balance is there. But for many parents, some posting on here, it's not as simple as that. Every parent wants their child to succeed. For most (and unfortunately, for higher education facilities) this is measured in the grades they achieve.

CW, your school sounds like my school. My DC had been told to choose from the same subjects as yours, stuff he has zero interest in. He put triple science as his number one choice. He also didn't get one of his other choices, so ATM it's a 50% hit rate.

I do appreciate that but as somebody who works in HE I find it heartbreaking that we have so many students and so many potential employees (not academics) who have outstanding qualifications but who, when it comes down to it, can't write well and can't complete fairly simple arithmetical tasks. I'm talking about people who have a Masters and are looking for an entry level professional job but who cannot write in the correct tense or work out a simple percentage. I find it very sad that young people in their mid to late 20s with strings of A grade GCSEs, good A'Levels, degrees from reasonable universities and post grad qualifications don't have the functional skills to succeed in the workplace.

Finally P3ppaPig I fully appreciate what the world is like. That's why both our children went to independent schools. We looked at the options where we live and across three London Boroughs found not a single school we felt was good enough, including Tiffin, for our son and only two for our daughter.

AnyFucker: he wasn't even allowed to express an opinion on double or triple science. The school simply told people what they would be doing, whether they liked it or not.

I hate the school so much (this is just typical of their attitude to everything) that we're actually considering a bloody free school instead! At least they want to ask DS what he'd like to take. However I am not happy that this could be in any way taken as an endorsement of Gove and his awful education policy. When actually it's despair at what new labour and now Gove have done to education in this country.

Agree with pippa, and tbh citing loads of people who got 3 O levels back in the day from Ampleforth is irrelevant, the teaching used to be awful at A,
( not the case now ) and most of them got their jobs/ army appointments based on family connections. The world has moved on.
When schools get students to do core and additional rather than triple they ime do it with the students best interests at heart. It does not close any doors for them, providing they get good grades in those 2 exams.
The school 2 of my dc go to only offers core and additional, they got 12 into Oxbridge and 14 into medicine last year.
At the school I teach at we offer both routes, we are offering less triple from next year onwards, but that is due to the change to terminal exams and how students are coping with that. The worst case scenario is you allow a borderline student to take triple and they end up failing one or more of them, whereas if they had sat core and additional they would have got 2 Bs and been able to study science A levels. Every year we take a lot of students froma feeder 11-16 high school that also does not offer triple. Their students do fine at A level, and several of those students have offer from good RG/dentistry/med courses for this autumn.

And perhaps DD will get A/A* rather than A/A/A and maybe dyslexic spelling being what it is she'll just get A/A.

In the end it probably won't matter for her or for the school legume tables, she'll have still made expected progress.

However, the school have gained an unpaid Teaching Assistant for years and that's not very ethical.

Explaining stuff to your peers is a good up to a point, she has long passed this point.